Recently I was contacted about a Volvo tractor trailer whose brakes allegedly spontaneously applied to the parking brakes. This is supposedly true even with positive air pressure showing on the gages. Volvo is apparently fully aware of this problem and no immediate recall has been issued.
Has any driver had this sort of problem? Can anyone else substantiate this problem?
I have blogged about CSA 2010 before (click here for a general overview) and was looking forward to the new system which, allegedly, will be able to asses more than the 1-2% of trucking companies that under the current system are currently evaluated. Unfortunately the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration said it was pushing back the start of CSA 2010 until late 2010, with some portions delayed until 2011. The schedule, published in the Federal Register April 9th, can be read in full here.
CSA 2010 was to originally start this summer, but unsafe trucking companies have realized that it will be tougher to circumvent the new rules and have asked for more time. Surprisingly, the FMCSA agreed. The trucking industry continues to try to water down the new regulations to continue "business as normal."
The new schedule calls for a so-called “data preview” to run through Nov. 30, at which time FMCSA will begin issuing warning letters and using CSA 2010 scores to target fleets for compliance reviews and extra roadside enforcement. Full, nationwide implementation of all of CSA 2010’s new enforcement tools will not begin until 2011.
The public will not be able to view the Crash Indicator scores in November because of concerns about the quality of the underlying crash data. As I understand the concerns some states don’t report all the information that they should, making the crash data LOWER than it should be if all the crashes were reported. While this may make the data imperfect, it can certainly be used to find and get off the road unsafe trucking companies. If the imperfect data shows the companies are bad, the real data would show they are WORSE!
The FMCSA just issued its final rule on Electric On Board Recorders (EOBR’s) which replace paper driver logs. Paper logs are often called comic books in the industry because the contents are so funny, because they are so false. A switch to EOBR’s will try to eliminate this known problem in the trucking industry. The full text of the rule may be seen here. For known problems with EOBR’s click the link to my prior blog here. For past posts regarding EOBR’s just past EOBR into the search box and you will have a number of posts on the topic.
The FMCSA has new performance standards for electronic on-board recorders (EOBRs) installed in commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) manufactured on or after June 4, 2012. On-board hours-of-service (HOS) recording devices meeting FMCSA’s current requirements and installed in CMVs manufactured before June 4, 2012 may continue to be used for the remainder of the service life of those CMVs. Motor carriers that have demonstrated serious noncompliance with the HOS rules will be subject to mandatory installation of EOBRs meeting the new performance standards. If FMCSA determines, based on HOS records reviewed during a compliance review, that a motor carrier has a 10 percent or greater violation rate (‘‘threshold rate violation’’) for any HOS regulation listed in the new Appendix C to part 385, FMCSA will issue the carrier an EOBR remedial directive. The motor carrier will then be required to install EOBRs in all of its CMVs regardless of their date of manufacture and use the devices for HOS record keeping for a period of 2 years, unless the carrier (i) already equipped its vehicles with automatic on-board recording devices (AOBRDs) meeting the Agency’s current requirements under 49 CFR 395.15 prior to the finding, and (ii) demonstrates to FMCSA that its drivers understand how to use the devices.
The FMCSA also changes the safety fitness standard to take into account a remedial directive when determining fitness. Additionally, to encourage industry-wide use of EOBRs, FMCSA revises its compliance review procedures to permit examination of a random sample of drivers’ records of duty status after the initial sampling, and provides partial relief from HOS supporting documents requirements, if certain conditions are satisfied, for motor carriers that voluntarily use compliant EOBRs. Finally, because FMCSA recognizes that the potential safety risks associated with some motor carrier categories, such as passenger carriers, hazardous materials transporters, and new motor carriers seeking authority to conduct interstate operations in the United States, are such that mandatory EOBR use for such operations might be appropriate, the Agency will initiate a new rulemaking to consider expanding the scope of mandatory EOBR use beyond the ‘‘1 x 10’’ carriers that would be subject to a remedial directive as a result of today’s rule.
The Agency is still moving forward with new Hours of Service Rules.
Andrew Wolfson wrote an excellent article for the Louisville, Kentucky Currier-Journal on the dangerous trucking company that was responsible for putting truck on the road that killed eleven people in Kentucky. The company, identified as Hester, Inc. DOT number 1222388, had horrible safety scores, putting it in the bottom percentages of all trucking companies its size in America. In short, from a safety standpoint, the company put the lives of its drivers and members of the public at risk on a daily basis.
Previously I blogged on possible causes for this collision, now the NTSB is investigating and we will see which of my possible explanations is right. Mr Wolfson made a good choice in speaking to qualified experts and a fine trucking attorney, who I am happy to call a friend, Tim Lange.
Schneider has replaced 1/4 of its fleets’ computers to allow for EOBR’s and better navigation. The replacements began in October of 2009 and Schneider is reportedly installing Qualcomm MCP200 units. The units allow cellular, Wi-Fi, and Internet connections for the driver.
Today a tragic accident occurred in Munfordville, Hart County, KY involving a tractor trailer that crossed the median on I-65 and killed at least eleven people. The collision occurred at 5:30 AM and impacted the Esh family of Marrowbone, near Burkesville, Ky.
Given the time of day that this collision occurred, one of the primary issues is going to be fatigue of the tractor trailer driver. It is likely that he fell asleep and that caused him to cross the median. I have blogged extensively on this before, whether from hours of service violations and fake logs, or from sleep apnea, fatigue is absolutely deadly.
A second possibility would be a load shift, causing the driver to loose control. This might have implications for the company that loaded the tractor trailer, depending on how the facts develop.
Finally, technology exists that would have prevented this tragedy. I have blogged on lane departure systems that would have alerted the tracto trailer driver before this tragedy occured.
The preventable tragedy that occurred in this case is something my firm deals with on a regular basis across the country and why we donate to truckingsafety organizations that attempt to make the roads safer.
The Truck Accident Lawyers at the Law Offices of Morgan Adams concentrate in protecting the rights of those who were seriously injured or lost a loved one in an accident with a commercial truck or bus. Our lawyers are based in Tennessee, but serve clients throughout the nation. If you or someone you love has been seriously hurt by a careless driver, don’t sign anything the trucking company gives you — contact us as soon as possible at 866-580-4878 or by email to learn more at a free, confidential consultation.
I have previously posted on how dangerous old and defective tires are, and on how to determine the age of your tires. A jury recently agreed that tires can be dangerous and defective and returned a verdict against Cooper Tires for 28 Million dollars.
The Iowa jury listened to the argument that Cooper trial put savings first and safety second in making its decision. Given the horrible losses that were involved I know the family would rather have their loved ones back. This was an accident that the jury found did not need to happen and Cooper Tires paid hte price for cutting corners.
The Western Section of the Tennessee Court of Appeals recently decided that buses in Tennessee are not required to have seat belts. In this case a man was thrown from a bus and received a catastrophic brain injury. The Court of Appeals stated that since the federal government does not mandate seat belts on buses, pursuant to FMVSS 208, the state can not require them. This decision, finding that federal law preempted the issues, was contrary to a 2008 decision in Texas that found seat belts could be required on buses.
It is clear from my prior blogs that I believe seat belts are needed in buses. They. Save. Lives. Many of my clients would be alive, and others able to live a normal life, if they had simply been able to wear a seat belt while on a bus.
Seat belts are on airplanes. If a seat belt will save you after falling 20,000 feet from the sky, and the cost of the seat belt and the increased fuel costs are more than offset by the increased safety of having them, shouldn’t we have seat belts on buses?
If seat belts on buses don’t matter, why are they provided for the bus driver?
Certainly seat belts should be provided on school buses, but the Court of Appeal’s decision would eliminate the states ability to require that. For an article on the need for seat belts on school buses, and the costs, click here. Please see my prior blogs on this topic.
Regardless, unless there is an appeal (and I hope there is), the current law in Tennessee allows bus companies and owners, who know that the lack of seat belts on buses is a horrible problem, to continue escaping liability for the deaths and injuries that occur when buses are ordered without seat belts.
In the case before the Western Section the jury found that the profoundly brain injured man, who was thrown from the bus due to a lack of seat belts, was entitled to over 8 Million in lost income and other damages. The decision by the Western Section Court of Appeals made it clear that the verdict will never be collected from the bus company, the one company that is directly responsible for purchasing and operating an unsafe bus without seat belts.
The full opinion can be read here.
Landra Reid, 69, underwent surgery Friday at a Virginia hospital to stabilize injuries from a broken neck she suffered in the traffic accident. Virginia State Police say Landra and her 49-year-old daughter were traveling northbound on I-95 near Washington Thursday when their minivan was rear-ended by a tractor-trailer loaded with rolls of plastic. The Reid’s minivan was pushed into the cars in front of them, resulting in a multiple car pile up and multiple injuries.
The truck driver has since been charged with reckless driving.
What happened? Typically rear end collisions like this occur for the following, preventable, reasons:
One thing seems clear, there is likely not enough insurance to deal with all the people hurt in the wreck if the trucking company purchased the minimum insurance limits of $750,000. Given the serious, life threatening, injuries of Landra Reid, and the massive life changes she will endure recovering from and dealing with the consequences of this collision, the $750,000 minimum limits are not enough to cover her claims, much less that of her her daughters. Then we have the other injured victims in the cars that were hit subsequently as Mrs. Reid’s minivan was slammed into the cars in front of her by the force of the impact by the tractor trailer. In cases with smaller truck companies (More About Pam Transportation Below), all of these victims would have to divide the single policy, frequently limiting them to recovering less than their medical bills.
The trucking company involved in this case appears (The company was identified by a local news report and photograph) to bePAM TRANSPORT INC (DOT number 179752 and MC number MC-150496) with 1769 trucks, 2,168 drivers who travel over 200 million miles a year on the roads and highways of America. Pam Transportation is a middle of the road company in regards to safety, with approximately 52% of the trucking companies in America having better driver safety histories on average. The FMCSA has not performed a safety audit (Compliance Review) since 2007 of Pam Transportation so really there is no way of telling about the company’s actual safety record. Less than 2% of trucking companies a year have compliance audits. The new CSA 2010 regulations will help identify safety problems with a trucking company, but clearly to late for these victims.
Our firm handles cases like this every year. We have posted many blogs on the above topics. It is a tragedy every time this happens, no matter when it happens or who is involved. One can only hope that the silver lining will be the enactment of some of the reasonable safety reforms I, and groups like Parents Against Tired Truckers, Crash, and the Truck Safety Coalition, have been advocating for to make the roads safer.
Tanker rollovers are incredibly dangerous as we have blogged about repeatedly in the past. Currently there are no government mandates requiring anti-rollover technology despite it being readily available and over 725 tanker rollovers a year. A recent amendment to a bill would require the government to report on tanker rollovers and methods and recommendation to reduce them, such as anti-rollover technology.
Past studies have concluded that 75% of tanker rollover’s are due to the tanker driver’s error. I conclude from that that well over 50% of tanker drivers are inadequately trained.